Cambridge bans kilts at graduation...

[macwilkin]

The BBC is running this story this morning on the Scotland news page:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4384391.stm

Row blows up over kilt ban move

Cambridge University has come under intense criticism after banning Scottish students from wearing kilts at graduation ceremonies.
The institution has outlawed the kilt along with other forms of national dress and armed forces uniforms.

Deputy First Minister and Cambridge graduate Jim Wallace condemned the ban, along with the Scottish National Party and Scottish Conservatives.

A university spokesman said it wanted all graduates to be seen as equals.

Mr Wallace told The Scotsman newspaper: "Instead of clamping down, they should be more flexible.

"You must be able to combine the best of the traditional, such as gowns and hoods, with something that allows you, if you want to, to wear your national dress.

"As long as it is still dignified, then this should be allowed."

The SNP's home affairs spokesman, Kenny MacAskill, described the ban to the newspaper as "petty and very narrow-minded".

And Bill Aitken, Scottish Conservative MSP for Glasgow, called it "total and utter nonsense".

A spokesman for Cambridge University said that graduation regulations had always stressed that traditional dress - trousers and ties for men, dresses or suits for women - should be worn, but they had never really been enforced until now.

Religious exception

The decision to ban national dress, including kilts and army uniforms, came as more and more people took to wearing them.

He said: "The Praelectors (graduation regulations officials) found that just recently the breaches of their regulations have been more prolific and more extreme.

"They asked if they could allow them to be enforced."

He explained: "The underlying reason for the graduation ceremony is that you become a member of Cambridge University.

"Whether you are a Scottish member, a New Zealand member or an army one, you are all members of Cambridge University," he added.

The spokesman pointed out that several other universities shared the policy. He also said that religious dress did not come under the regulations.

[bjcustard]

English wankers...

[bubba]

Simple solution, the students just pick up their diplomas and skip the ceremony. If enough do that they'll back off fast.

[Jimmy Carbomb]

So it's okay for College Professors to preach politics in their classes, but it's not okay to espress and display your birth-right, occupational choice or heritage.

I sure hope that the students are savvy enough to all wear religious turbins in protest.

[highlander_Daz]

Clearly this is non-enforcable under the human rights act

Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to freedom of expression. Before the Human Rights Act 1998 came into force, the right to freedom of expression was a negative one: you were free to express yourself, unless the law otherwise prevented you from doing so. With the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into English and Welsh domestic law, the right to freedom of expression is now expressly guaranteed.

However, the right to freedom of expression in Article 10 is not absolute. Interferences with the right to freedom of expression may be permitted if they are prescribed by law, pursue a legitimate aim and are necessary in a democratic society, that is, satisfy a pressing social need. The legitimate purposes for which freedom of expression can be limited are:


National security, territorial integrity or public safety.
The prevention of disorder or crime.
The protection of health or morals.
The protection of the reputation or rights of others.
The prevention of the disclosure of information received in confidence.
For maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

freedom of expression is a human right and the right to express one "heritage" is clearly covered article 14 deals with discrimination


The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.

clearly if one is allowed to wear religious garb then not to be allowed to wear traditional garb of one native or adopted country is discrimination. I only wish I was a graduate at cambridge, then again I dont its clearly run by bigoted upperclass twits

[bubba]

Jimmy, those ceremonies are vastly important to the schools (I'm only speaking from my knowlege of the colleges in my area). Some years back the college here tried to enforce the trousers and tie rules to try eliminating the wearing of jeans. So few students showed up for the ceremonies and so few rented the caps and gowns the administration nearly paniced. You could have heard crickets chirp. They gave it up deciding the traditional ceremony was more important than the dress code. The same thing would likely work in this case.

[phil h]

English wankers...

hey steady on,we are not all the same.

[Jimmy Carbomb]

Yikes Daz!!!!!

That was a quick response with all that information!

Impressive!

You just have to wonder if this is considered to be a publice or private institution with self-regulating loopholes.

[Big Dave]

It is the Universities choice on how they want their ceremonies conducted. On one hand they want the world to see all those attending the university are equal. On the other hand they will loose many because people won't be able to contuct themselves as individuals at their school. Unless the students fight for themselves there is nothing anyone can do for them.

[GMan]

I am somewhat perplexed by this situation. Equality means equality. I am wondering if it can be enforced, especially after reading the post Daz shared with us.

I could really go on about this, but this is not the place for my many rants, so all I will say is Kilt Power.